Comments? The biggest logical flaw lies in the ignorance of the fact that reaching a final is better than falling before it (reverse this: not reaching the finals is worse than trailing in H2H stat). Federer (20), Nadal (17) and Novak Djokovic (15) have won 52 of the last 63 Grand Slam events dating to Wimbledon in 2003. Encouraged by the skewed interpretation of the H2H, some have even raised this question, "Can Roger win when Rafa is around?". Nadal is favored to get to the final with -140 odds. It is not intended to downplay Rafael Nadal’s achievement either, definitely not his clean six Slams. Sergi Bruguera has better H2H against Sampras because of clay, and it could have been more lopsided had Sampras advanced to semis and finals on clay. The world No. And he quotes Sampras, "Tough question to answer. Federer did slightly better due to his no. “And, of course, I’d love to play against him here at Wimbledon.”. Had Federer reached the Monte Carlo and Rome Masters finals this year and, let’s say, he lost both of them to Nadal, his H2H with Nadal would have increased to 7-15 in Federer’s disfavor. I am arguing against where and how the H2H logic is used. Federer admitted he is looking forward to another matchup with Nadal. Nadal: 2/5 Livescores provided by Livescore.in. Speaking on equalling Federer, Nadal said, "Today I don't think about equalling Roger, today for me is the Roland Garros victory. To give a postmodern twist, we may call it a post-H2H logic. Probably it will not change if I win, if I lose.”, Forbes detailed why the last Nadal-Federer Wimbledon match in 2008 has been called the “greatest men’s match of all time.”. These propagandists should have at least considered the obvious, "If Federer is not the best player of his generation, then who is?". And me, too. Rafa Nadal vs. Roger Federer Head to Head: Record & Grand Slams Won, Copyright © 2020 Heavy, Inc. All rights reserved. Should we give Sampras higher mark for maintaining his H2H against his rivals because he escaped 17 Masters and did not advance beyond the third round except on eight occasions, clay Masters Series and RG combined (eight out of 36 in 13 years) and punish Federer for consistently reaching four RG finals and 11 Finals at the Masters on clay (advancing beyond third round on 25 out of 37 occasions in 11 years)? ). To caution, this piece is not written in defense of Roger Federer’s GOATness. Nadal has two Wimbledon championships with his last title coming in 2010. Nadal has commonly been known for his advantage on clay, while Federer has traditionally played better on grass. According to the ATP Rulebook, the tennis authority is neutral to H2H as it counts toward neither ranking points, nor award, nor a title, nor even as a tie breaker. Yes, it is convenient to throw one-liner stat, 13-7 overall or 5-2 at the Slam level, but there is so much into it, and, yes, the flaw lies in the conclusion that Federer critics draw out of this H2H stat. Federer has won 20 Grand Slams, while Nadal trails slightly with 18 major titles. Thanks heaven, tennis is not boxing and you don't win a championship by challenging and beating the title holder. That’s all. Instead of exiting in the early rounds, if Rafa had reached those finals and lost in all, would it be logical to use those loses against Rafa’s achievement? But that does not put Nadal above Federer in any measure. Check out our soccer betting predictions with the latest odds. We have head-to-head results and stats for all ITF, WTA & ATP tennis matches since 1969. READ: French Open 2020 Nadal vs Schwartzman semi-final live stream in India, preview and H2H. Prior to that match, Federer beat Nadal in the 2006 and ’07 Wimbledon finals. The player who is unable to participate is awarded the same point as the one who loses in the first round; moreover, there are other penalties. Roger Federer vs Novak Djokovic all matches, with stats on their H2H rivalry. Always big respect. When ATP/ITF does not even consider using H2H stat as one of the ways to break a tie between two players’ rankings, Federer’s critics have been using this H2H statistics to question the best of the generation and/ or best of all times. We breakdown the Nadal vs. Federer head-to-head record, Wimbledon titles and Grand Slam victories. Head To Head. four and six players standing on the way to the finals of Masters and Slams, respectively. In a final considered by many the greatest men’s match of all time, Nadal ended Federer’s five-year run at the All-England Club, 6-4, 6-4, 6-7(5), 6-7(8), 9-7. The two have not squared off at Wimbledon since 2008 when Nadal won the lengthy match in five sets. There have been 102 Big Four Top Tier finals. Using the same logic, instead of falling before the finals, if Nadal had been good enough to reach the finals on those 12 Slams that Federer won and, let’s say, Rafa lost in all of them (actually he reached the Slam finals in only 2 occasions that Federer won), should we not conclude Rafa performed better than his other early exits, despite the 0-2 H2H deficit resulting from these two finals? The originality of my argument lies in the new logic of Roger’s lead over Rafa by 29-20 in STE. At best, the true value of H2H lies in predicting matches, less reliable in Grand Slams due to their 5-setter format. Send us a note, Site and original content ©2014 matchstat.com. Would not those finals be more rewarding for Rafa? Did Roger do better or did he not, especially in comparison to Rafa’s record on hard court Slams, AO and USO?